The politics of race

Over our winter break, in the midst of a political scandal that has engulfed the state of Illinois, embattled Gov. Rod Blagojevich appointed Roland Burris to Barack Obama’s vacated Senate seat. If seated, Burris would become the only black senator in the chamber.

The governor’s decision to appoint a senator while under investigation flew defiantly in the faces of colleagues who have urged his resignation since early December – and who officially impeached him last Friday.

More troubling, however, was the deeply unsubtle tone of racial resentment which permeated the appointment.

After formally announcing Burris as Obama’s successor, Blagojevich ceded the podium to U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush, who warned Senate Democrats “to not hang or lynch the appointee as you try to castigate the appointer.”

If allusions to white supremacy movements were not enough, Rush later called the Senate the “last bastion of plantation politics” and compared Majority Leader Harry Reid to segregationist George Wallace.

In anticipation of Senate opposition to his selection, Blagojevich allowed race to become the focal point of the appointment and seemingly encouraged Rush to emerge as its main crusader. Rush deliberately ignored the substance of Democrats’ objections and chose to cast opponents of Burris’ appointment as racists who would do anything to keep a black man out of the Senate.  

Of course, the timing could not be more ironic. In just more than a week, Obama will take the oath of office as the first black president, an office he won after a brief tenure in, you guessed it, the U.S. Senate.  

If our legislative bodies are to fulfill their purpose under the Constitution, then it seems desirable that the Senate be as diverse as the individuals who its members represent. And on this note, as Rush would contend, the Senate has historically missed the mark. Burris would only be the sixth black senator in U.S. history.

Rush champions the notion that Burris deserves a seat simply for the sake of having a black person in the Senate, as if Burris is entitled to such a position by virtue of his skin color.

But allowing someone to possess a high office because of his skin color is just as racist as denying him a seat for the same reason. If Burris belongs in the Senate, which he seemingly does from his qualifications from having served as Illinois attorney general, it is due to his credentials and experience, not because he would be its only black member.

Now, as Democratic leaders reverse their earlier positions and express approbation in a speedy seating of Burris, it is evident that despite his credentials and the legality of his appointment, a racial discourse ultimately carries the most influence in generating results. In this case, the fear of affirming the accusations lobbed against them by Rush jostled Reid and other Democrats to embrace Burris after originally characterizing his appointment as illegitimate.      

This incident provides a sobering reminder that racial unease in America still thrives and is still used as an instrument of political pressure.

Roland Burris should be seated as the junior Senator from Illinois because of the content of his character, not the color of his skin.